What does it mean to be smart? If you’re like most people, your definition of intelligence varies about yourself as much as it does about others, including your children. Here, Mara Shapiro discusses intelligence and how it encompasses a wide range of definitions.
Mentor College - Photograph by Andrew Tolson
What Does it Mean to be Smart?
We hear so much about “smart” these days. We are inundated with programs that claim to train the brain or make kids our kids “smarter.” Companies market their study systems with the promise that their activities or programs will help kids do better in school or push them ahead of the pack.
But, what exactly does a “smart” kid look like?
Do they get the best grades at school, or can they answer the most math questions in the shortest period of time? What about being able to figure out a complex word problem or write an original and analytical essay—can they do that? Can they navigate from point A to point B without a map or understand how to help repair someone’s hurt feelings or their carburetor? Do they have the ability to play a concerto on the piano or to design makeup for a science fiction movie?
Personally, I think SMART is all of the above.
Why Being Smart is More Than Just a Word
When you look at my three children, you’ll see why.
The eldest, a girl, has street cred. She can take care of herself. She’s intuitive about people and situations. She talked at one year, was reading by the age of four independently, and at the age of 18, holds down two jobs as well as going to school. She can take beautiful photographs, dances, loves fashion, and applies makeup like a pro. Her grades are mediocre at best, unless she really puts her nose to the grindstone.
Is she smart?
The second, a boy, can play three instruments and several sports, although he excels at none and hasn’t a competitive bone in his body. He has tons of friends, an innate sense of people and their needs, and is always busy. He’s extremely analytical and never takes anything at face value. His marks in school are quite good, although he rarely puts any effort in his work. He is equally good at math, science and language-based courses. He has a nearly photographic memory.
Is he smart?
The last, also a boy, is gifted in the 100th percentile. This means his scores were the highest of the test group of any child his age. He also has ADHD. He has trouble making friends, doesn’t excel at any sport or extracurricular activity, and prefers the company of a book or computer. He knows 10 programming languages and knows just about everything (I’m not exaggerating). However, he does quite poorly in school, is extremely disorganized, and rarely finishes assignments.
Is he smart?
Personally, I think they all are smart. But, not all of them fall into the dictionary definition—“having or showing a quick witted intelligence”—which they all do, by the way. My kids each have areas that they excel at, whether they are academics, music, technology, the arts, or yes, even people.
The Many Forms of Intelligence
Smartness comes in many shapes and forms. Not everybody can be good at everything, and when we focus just on specific types of academic achievement or on creating “smarter kids,” we lose a whole component of intellectual, creative and social development. We also run the risk of missing opportunities for individual achievement and the self-discovery of innate and unique talents, not to mention the damage of children’s self-esteem when they don’t measure up.
Here’s a personal example: Notwithstanding any training, enrichment or tutoring, I cannot do math. My brain doesn’t process the kind of logic that’s required to decode formulas or algebra. The numbers literally dance in front of my eyes. I’m not visual, although I was able to do well at geometry, as I could create a “story” around the rules. But, I’m very good with words, storytelling and people. My creativity also comes out when I cook, and I have a strong sense of empathy and the ability to problem-solve human situations.
Do you think I’m smart? You bet I am. My parents sent me to a private school that allowed my creative side to flow. They had unorthodox teaching methods that included a lack of desks and a free-flowing classroom when we could learn at our own pace, and where my lack of aptitude at math was overshadowed by my achievement in languages and arts.
Same goes for my children. Through our choices of schools and camps, we have been able to help them find their own unique abilities and be their best selves. From sports camps to dance camps and arts-based education to multiple types of after-school programs in the school, my three children have been able to find out who they are and what they do well.
I firmly believe that if we are going to create “smarter children” we need to recalibrate exactly what we consider to be smart. The world is made up of so many different types of people, talents and occupations. Each one requires a different skill set—from artist to garbage collector, neuroscientist to electrician. Our job as parents or educators is to provide opportunities for kids to figure out exactly what they are good at and help them to be their own very smartest selves.
So tell, me…what are you SMART at?
* * * * *
What do you think, what does being smart mean to you? Share your thoughts in the Comments section below.
Related:
Girls’ Self-Esteem: Beauty is in the Eye of the Facebook User
Five Ways Neuroscience Will Change Education
How Neuroscience Opened My Eyes to Helping My Kids Reach Their Full Potential
My Teen Is So Smart: Why Aren’t They Doing Anything With It?
Improving Brain Function for Children with Learning Disabilities
About Mara Shapiro
Wonderful and truly meaningful post. Intelligence has many different forms and embodiments and we should know how to distinguish them. I can say that I’m smart at planning and creativity but the execution of the plan is my weak unit.
Thanks for your comments! Totally agree that we need to appreciate the diversity of gifts each individual offers, and value each unique talent. Unfortunately, people tend to value only certain gifts or talents. At the same time, we can always strive to contribute our best with the unique gifts we have been given, although we are not supermen and superwomen, as we have our own strengths and weaknesses. -cd
I'm wondering how you see the difference between skills and intelligence. Do infants have intelligence for instance? Are adults more intelligent than children because adults have more skills? Or is intelligence an innate capacity to learn?
Yes, people have various profiles of strengths and weaknesses. But I don't think this means intelligence is a myth in the sense that you are implying: ie we are all equally intelligent just maybe in different ways. There are measurable differences in human abilities, and unfortunately nature doesn't always dole out abilities in one area to make up for weaknesses in another.
The motto "All children are gifted" seems democratic and virtuous, but it is a denial of a valid dimension of human difference. I wonder if it's possible to acknowledge that difference without placing value on it. Then we would be able to embrace the diversity of human beings, and meet all our kids where they are.
Hi Cathy, thanks for your thoughts, you bring up some great questions and ideas! I think perhaps intelligence can be thought of by some as a set definition, and that's part of where the myth of intelligence comes from, but I think you're right in that we are all intelligent in different ways and I believe that was what Mara was trying to show in her examples. I think in theory it's possible not to place value on things except that we are generally a society driven by that, by labels to make sense of where we belong and how we fit in, or what's 'normal'. I do think that not putting as much emphasis on labels can help us open our minds and hearts to others without taking away from the uniqueness and individuality of each person, or their value. Great discussion! ^em
I don't think we are all "intelligent in different ways." We each have **relative** strengths – things we are better at and things we are worse at, but it can happen that in my greatest area of strength, I am still not particularly good at it.
It would be wonderful were it otherwise, but it just is not how the world works. That doesn't make the person who *is* smart at something a more worthwhile human being than the one who isn't smart at anything – it is just another aspect of variety, as surely as height.
Part of it, for me, comes in how we feel about our aptitudes: I am not proud of my intelligence. I am proud of what I do with it.
*****
Separately, I find myself a bit surprised by your own perpetuation of myth!
You wrote:
"I cannot do math. My brain doesn’t process the kind of logic that’s required to decode formulas or algebra."
and
"I was able to do well at geometry…"
Your brain produces logic that permitted you to decode formulas. You DID math. You did it WELL, by your own account.
"Not everybody can be intelligent in every" form of math. There are many people who find Algebra a mystery and geometry well within their grasps. There are legions for whom geometry is a conundrum, but whose command of algebraic functions is superb. There are some who are good at both and some who are "bad at math," and can do neither.
You are not "bad at math." You're bad at Algebra and good at Geometry.
Hey Josh, great perspective! I don't think being stronger in one area makes anyone better than anyone else either, I think that's one of the best ways we learn from one another too. I'm sure that Mara will have some comments as well – thanks for sharing your thoughts with us
^em
Ourkids, I think my earlier comment was unclear. I don’t think people are all equally intelligent even if we consider their strengths in different areas. That would be nice, but it just isn’t true.
What matters is that people are all *equally valuable*. The real myth of intelligence is that having more of it makes a person more valuable. That is why it hurts to be told we have less, right?
If we could stop perpetuating that myth, we would be able to acknowledge that differences in human intelligence do exist, and they have important impacts on the lives of human beings.
As long as we are stuck in the place of denial (Saying we’re all equally intelligent, just maybe in different ways) we are tacitly agreeing with the idea that intelligence makes a person valuable by defending ourselves against it!
Gotcha, Cathy! I understand what you're saying. I think you and Josh both brought up great points. Do you think they address these ideas enough in schools? ^em
I don't think they really address these ideas at all – "enough" is an ethereal concept in a country that is in deep denial about the *needs* of high aptitude kids.
The fear of the general public in this regard has been written about for about a century now –> there is a conviction that somehow by giving the kids who can learn more and/or more quickly appropriate opportunities, one is perpetrating an injustice on others or feeding the egos of the more able learners.
There are theories for why this might be. Among those is that a significant number of people think *they* would be egotistical in that situation, and therefore it seems obvious to them that these are kids must turn out that way and feel that way. Therefore it would be better, they think, to deny them the opportunity for such egoism, and to pull them down or slow them down while there is still a chance!
This is not a particularly kind perspective, but as one watches how so much of modern America – especially in the schools – generally deals with those it considers smart, it is hard to escape.
I don’t think it’s addressed by schools at all. The competitive nature of our educational system contributes to it, and whenever teachers and administrators make decisions based on concerns that gifted students will feel superior to others, they’ve bought into it. Intelligence is a great big elephant in the room that nobody is allowed to talk about. Kids are given conflicting messages:
1. Be smart so you can feel good about yourself.
2. Other people don’t want to know you’re smart.
Neither of these messages is healthy! Articles like this one are reinforcing the message that “it’s not okay to talk about being smart, in fact being smart is a myth.”
You are fortunate to be able to afford schools & camps for your children. But what about those who are not so fortunate? Schools should notice and nurture the strengths and abilities of our children, but often they do not. Child find says schools should identify children’s weakness and support them, but often that fails, too.
It may take an unbelievable level of advocacy to get the slightest accommodations for strength or weaknesses. Parents of gifted kids, or worse, twice exceptional kids (gifted AND learning disabled) must become experts just to have their children identified, and most public schools offer only trivial “enrichment” gifted programs that do not meet the strengths and needs of the child.
These kids are Smart. How do we support them when they cannot afford special schools and programs? Or is Smart only for those who can afford those schools and programs? If so, what is the loss to society? And what is the socall/emotional harm to the child?
Frustratedly yours, Carolyn K.
Hi all. Thanks for your incredible and thoughtful commentary on my post. I'll try to answer to each of your points individually. I'll start here at the most recent one. Carolyn: I should clarify that my kids went to private nursery school as they didn't go to daycare. They're all at public school for high school. Yes, we are lucky we are able to send them to summer camp. And, yes, there is an incredible amount of advocacy required to get accommodations for kids in school-my eldest has GAD (anxiety) and youngest is gifted, ADHD, and has an LD. So, I totally get you. How do we support them? Well, it's a lot of work. But, the main point is to help them find where their intelligence lays instead of pressuring them to fit into a box of conventional intelligence or 'smart'.
Cathy: You asked me about the difference between skill and intelligence. I think these are very different things. Skills can be learned, but intelligence is innate. My point in the article was that humans possess different types of intelligence, and that by continually encouraging kids just to be 'smarter', we are losing sight of their potential in other areas. As Josh points out, not everyone is born equal. It's impossible. Not everyone can be 'smarter' or 'the smartest'. But, instead, they may possess intelligence in other areas.
Josh: I love your comments and your arguments. With regard to the math, doing well in geometry, for that one test, required an incredible amount of studying and memorization. I had no idea what I was memorizing. I can guarantee you that I cannot do math. I'm pretty sure that you got the main essence of my article when you say that not everyone is born equal. I think that the semantics of skill, intelligence, and strength are what holding us back from being in agreement, which I'm pretty sure we are
What you are describing is not different kinds of intelligence but, instead, different personalities. No doubt all of your children display a great aptitude in those areas you described. Like all humans, we tend to show a particular interest in those things we have success in and, quite naturally, are happy to pursue those interests even when they may seem uninteresting to others. Like your comment regarding your personal history with math I'm willing to bet that, overall, it is a subject you didn't like as a child because you didn't experience the same success in algebra as you did in your more creative endeavours. Just ask John Mighton, author of "The End of Ignorance" and founder of the JUMP math program what his response would be do the idea that some people simply can't do math.
As you are likely aware, much of what you talked about is an idea popularized by Gardner when he developed his theory of multiples intelligences. Like your own observations, it emphasis different intelligences such as as linguistic, spatial, interpersonal, and so on. For many educators, this theory seems to be quite intuitive since it appears that kids have different abilities, learning preferences, and interests. The problem with the idea that there are different intelligences and, by association, different learning styles is twofold: first, there is no scientific evidence that actually supports this theory and; second, it a completely impractical approach to teaching in a classroom setting.
Let me comment further on my second point. Many well-meaning teachers do everything they can to facilitate the variety of "intelligences" and learning styles within their classroom. In reality, all it really leads to is confusion and chaos. What we choose to teach is, as a result, relative and only important to some students and not others. In addition, If some kids are "visual" learners and others more "tactile" then how, from a practical point of view, do we create a learning environment that meets all of their needs? The idea that discovery learning or an endless stream of projects can solve that problem only waters-down actual learning.
As parents, we limit our children when we by into the notion that multiple intelligences and learning styles actually exist. As I mentioned, it's easy to be convinced because it seems so intuitive and, therefore, appeals to our emotions. Of course we should encourage our children to pursue their interests and talents but suggesting that an individual simply isn't wired to learn something like math, is, in itself, a myth.
Hi Marc, thanks for sharing your ideas! You bring up some great questions for both parents and teachers, and for parents I think who struggle to find a school that will meet their child's specific needs and learning styles. I can recall, similar to Mara's situation, being terrible at math in school – however, I found that the way a few of the teachers presented the concepts made all the difference. I've always excelled more in writing, but the one or two teachers who actually made me LIKE math and helped me to do well in their classes suggests to me that it is possible for students to still do well in a subject they struggle with. Great points! ^em